From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,350d56069dc98b72
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,350d56069dc98b72
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-10-30 02:11:23 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.software-eng
Path: nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uunet!mole-end!mat
From: mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us
Subject: Re: Lines of documentation per LOC
Message-ID: <1994Oct29.104210.28462@mole-end.matawan.nj.us>
Summary: Documenting _after_ the program is done is like drawing plans after
 the building is built.
Organization: :
References: <1994Oct25.170005.27711@sei.cmu.edu>
 <1994Oct26.094543.24213@sei.cmu.edu>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 10:42:10 GMT
Xref: nntp.gmd.de comp.lang.ada:16310 comp.software-eng:19361
Date: 1994-10-29T10:42:10+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1994Oct26.094543.24213@sei.cmu.edu>, lpb@sei.cmu.edu (Loic Briand) writes:
> 
> In article <EACHUS.94Oct25190056@spectre.mitre.org>, eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) writes:
> |> In article <1994Oct25.170005.27711@sei.cmu.edu> lpb@sei.cmu.edu (Loic Briand) writes:

Documenting _after_ the program is done is like drawing plans
after the building is built.

> |>  > Is there any document or source of information that provides
> |>  > an accepted (?) ratio (lines of documentation / lines of code) for a 
> |>  > software design document (SDD)?

A better question, I think, is `how many lines of code result from a line
of SDD?'

The SDD, after all, specifies the code, and not the other way around.

> Robert, I am not totally stupid. I _know_ that the amount of documentation is
> function of the code.  The problem is that when you have a client who ask for
> 10 lines of doc par LOC and you have budgeted 0.1 (based on the expected
> complexity of your code), you have to prove your point.

I'd start by explaining that you write the code _from_ the design documents,
not the other way around.

If the design documents are sufficient to specify working code, there
should be no question about whether it is complete enough for the code.
-- 
 (This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end				Mark Terribile
 mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ
	(Training and consulting in C, C++, UNIX, etc.)